HC Deb 11 February 2002 vol 380 cc12-4
7. Mr. David Chaytor (Bury, North)

What recent discussions he has had with his US counterpart on the likely timing of a request to use UK facilities in respect of national missile defence. [31898]

The Secretary of State for Defence (Mr. Geoffrey Hoon)

I regularly discuss missile defence with my United States counterpart. The US Administration have not yet decided what type of missile defence system they will seek to deploy, or when. We have received no request from the US for the use of sites in the United Kingdom for missile defence purposes, nor any indication of when any such request might be made.

Mr. Chaytor

Does my right hon. Friend think that the decision to abrogate the ABM treaty is likely to increase or decrease the likelihood of other countries adhering to their international agreements? Does he have any evidence that China has already adjusted its defence policy in response to the national missile defence programme?

Mr. Hoon

There is a proper procedure within the terms of the ABM treaty for either party to withdraw. The United States has invoked that procedure and has therefore remained within the terms of the treaty in that respect. It follows that, by consistently observing the terms of the international treaty, no particular message should be sent to any other country as to its action in respect of existing treaties.

In answer to the hon. Gentleman's first supplementary question, it would seem that the formal withdrawal or notice of withdrawal from the terms of the treaty should not have any impact on any other international agreement. I have no evidence of any reaction by China to that decision, nor do I consider that there should be any reaction.

Mr. Nicholas Soames (Mid-Sussex)

Have the discussions that the Secretary of State has had with our American partners extended to improvements to the facilities at Fylingdales? In what circumstances was the extensive new work started without planning permission, and who was responsible?

Mr. Hoon

Given the events of 11 September, I judged it important that there should be an improvement in the level of security at the sensitive facilities at Fylingdales. I regret that the urgency of the work meant that formal planning permission was not sought. That matter has been put in hand and we are in discussion with the appropriate planning authorities. I hope that the House will recognise that in the light of events on 11 September, it was right that we should take urgent action to ensure that there was proper security at the base.

The only circumstances in which that issue has been discussed with the United States is in the context of discussions with US officials based at Fylingdales. There has been contact with them about the need for improvements in security.

Mrs. Louise Ellman (Liverpool, Riverside)

Did my right hon. Friend's discussions include consideration of the danger posed for nuclear proliferation by the 60,000 scientists from the former Soviet Union who have expert knowledge of weapons of mass destruction? Is he aware that many of those scientists are being approached by countries such as Iran and Iraq, which wish to develop their own nuclear arsenals?

Mr. Hoon

My hon. Friend raises a real concern and a real means by which nuclear weapons could proliferate throughout the world. Much concern has been expressed by several countries about the problem. It is something that we shall continue to highlight.

Mr. George Osborne (Tatton)

Does the Secretary of State agree with the American President, who said in his state of the union address that missile defences were an essential protection against an axis of evil, or does he agree with the 218 Labour Members who signed a motion against missile defence?

Mr. Hoon

We certainly understand why the United States is concerned about the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and why the US should wish to take effective action to deal with that. As I indicated to the House earlier, the Government's view is that missile defence may have a significant role to play in the context of preventing and dealing with the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

Glenda Jackson (Hampstead and Highgate)

As it would seem that my right hon. Friend's American counterpart cannot give him any direct information on whether there will be a national missile defence system or whether it will work, how can President Bush's promise to defend this country and Europe by means of NMD be brought into play? A sizeable body of scientific opinion and many military strategists believe—unlike the chocolate soldiers sitting on the Conservative Benches—that no such scheme could ever work and that, far from defending this country, it would place us in the front line of terrorist action.

Mr. Hoon

All I can say to my hon. Friend is that there is a significant and very well-funded programme in the United States for developing missile defence. That programme is at an early stage in its development, and I will not make any comments on its technical success at this stage, except to say that I am confident that the United States will deliver the system when it is ready to do so.